BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

7 results for “capital gains”+ Section 142(1)(iii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,297Delhi997Jaipur334Bangalore315Kolkata309Ahmedabad283Hyderabad254Chennai222Indore199Chandigarh171Karnataka132Pune120Surat120Cochin98Agra78Visakhapatnam72Rajkot70Raipur63Calcutta53Nagpur50Guwahati48Lucknow48Cuttack28Amritsar23Jodhpur21SC18Ranchi18Allahabad13Varanasi11Panaji11Patna10Dehradun7Telangana7Rajasthan4Jabalpur3Punjab & Haryana2K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 260A2Section 3022Section 3642Section 2012

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, vs. M/S Gulf Oil Corporation Pvt. Ltd.,

ITTA/195/2008HC Telangana23 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

142/­   against  average rate of Rs. 136. 25. As both these sale  rates   were   on   the   higher   side,   no   adverse  inference needs to be therefore drawn, since the  sales   were   at  a  rate   which   was  higher  than   the  average rate. The average rates are desirable to  be taken since it can simply not be presumed that  the transactions running into

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. M/s.Jayalakshmi Chits

ITTA/211/2008HC Telangana23 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

142/­   against  average rate of Rs. 136. 25. As both these sale  rates   were   on   the   higher   side,   no   adverse  inference needs to be therefore drawn, since the  sales   were   at  a  rate   which   was  higher  than   the  average rate. The average rates are desirable to  be taken since it can simply not be presumed that  the transactions running into

The Commissioner of Income Tax - VI vs. M/s. Manikanta Iron AND Hardware

ITTA/196/2008HC Telangana02 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

142/­   against  average rate of Rs. 136. 25. As both these sale  rates   were   on   the   higher   side,   no   adverse  inference needs to be therefore drawn, since the  sales   were   at  a  rate   which   was  higher  than   the  average rate. The average rates are desirable to  be taken since it can simply not be presumed that  the transactions running into

M/s. Canara Securities Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/3/2020HC Telangana25 Aug 2020

Bench: M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO,T.AMARNATH GOUD

1 and 2 companies and certain other individuals as Directors of 4 listed companies, 3 subsidiaries of one listed company and an unlisted company is bad in law since the Joint APLs merely represents the estate of PDB and thus, had no rights to seek appointment of Directors in companies in which PDB was not a "Member". Further, without prejudice

PR COMMR OF INCOME TAX-2, HYDERABAD vs. K RAVINDER REDDY, HYDERABAD

ITTA/621/2017HC Telangana23 Aug 2018

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

Section 260A

iii) a discussion of commercial issues ITA 621/2017 & connected matters Page 59 of 85 pertaining to the contract through the technical representative, after which an order was placed by the buyer directly. Apart from this, it is significant that the performance of the personnel in India was, as disclosed by the Chief Representative Officer, judged by the number of direct

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. Shri Raaj Kumar Jain

ITTA/147/2013HC Telangana28 Jun 2013
For Appellant: - Sri Yug Mohit Chaudhary assistedFor Respondent: - A.G.A., Sri Amit Mishra, Sri Gyan
Section 156(3)Section 201Section 302Section 363Section 364Section 366Section 376

Section 27 begins with a proviso and states that when any fact is deposed to as discovered, in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered may be proved, 49 whether it amounts to a confession

M/s Durga Granites, vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1,

ITTA/30/2023HC Telangana04 Sept 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

1. 1. The State of Jharkhand, through its Secretary, Department of Industries, Mines and Geology, having its office at Yojna Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi (Jharkhand), PIN 834 002. 2. The Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Jharkhand Mantralaya (Project Building), PO. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi-834002 (Jharkhand), 3. The Director, Mines